LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/JASON K LIN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Jason K Lin

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 517 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
54%vs 68% art-unit average14 pts
higher than about 22% of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2425
AU avg 68%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2425; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Examiner Jason K Lin has allowed 277 of 517 decided applications.

277 allowed
240 abandoned
Plus 34 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Jason K Lin maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 across one art unit. His pooled allowance rate is 54 percent, calculated from allowed and abandoned applications among all decided cases. This figure represents the share of his decided applications that resulted in allowance, across hundreds of decided applications. The 54 percent rate reflects his historical record in the technology center and is presented as a factual summary of outcomes to date, without reference to pending applications.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art units in TC 2400. The allowance rate of 54 percent describes past outcomes across the examiner's decided caseload and is a historical aggregate, not a prediction of the outcome of any specific application. Pooled figures represent an overall profile and do not account for variations in application complexity, claim scope, or other case-specific factors that may affect individual prosecution.

These are aggregate statistics from this examiner's past public record — not predictions about any specific application. The per-art-unit figures below show how the record varies across art units. Our approach to patent prosecution →

The record, art unit by art unit.1 art unit

Each section benchmarks this examiner against that art unit's average. Figures are this examiner's own public record within the art unit; the overall rate above pools them.

◈ PRIMARY · ART UNIT 2425
551 APPS · 54% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

54%
higher than about 22% of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2425
AU avg 68%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2425; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Disposition517 decided applications

277 allowed
240 abandoned
Plus 34 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 21mo
disposed 43.5mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 18.9 mo, disposed 36.3 mo.

Rejection groundsexaminer ● vs art-unit average ○

REJECTION RATE = SHARE OF THIS EXAMINER'S APPLICATIONS THAT DREW ≥1 OFFICE-ACTION REJECTION IN WHICH THE GROUND APPEARS

Grounds can co-occur, so the four don't sum to 100%. The art-unit figure is the unweighted mean across examiners in the art unit; §102 and §112 carry no art-unit benchmark.

§101 — Subject-matter eligibility
AU 24
28%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
82%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 83
95%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
45%

Interview benefit

Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.

without
41%
+28 pts
with
69%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 230 decided applications with an interview and 287 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jason K Lin

  • What is Jason K Lin's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate across Technology Center 2400 is 54 percent, based on decided applications (allowed and abandoned).
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    This record spans one art unit within TC 2400.
  • What does the allowance rate mean?
    The allowance rate is the percentage of his decided applications that were allowed. It excludes pending applications and represents a historical summary, not a prediction of any individual case outcome.
  • How large is the sample?
    The pooled record encompasses hundreds of decided applications across all art units.
◈ HOW LYNCH LLP CAN HELP

Where to go next.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. These are general resources about the firm's services — not advice about this examiner or any specific application.

How the firm prosecutes patentsApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.Appeals and PTAB practiceAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.IP portfolio strategyHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.Scheduling time with an attorneyFree and paid consultation options across the firm's attorneys.
◈ RESPONDING TO AN OFFICE ACTION

Strategy, not paperwork. Talk to the attorney doing the work.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. Book a consultation to discuss your matter with the attorney who would handle it.

Book a 30-minute consultation →
METHODOLOGY & DISCLOSURES

Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Jason K Lin has a public record within Technology Center 2400. Statistics are computed from publicly available USPTO records, refreshed on a recurring schedule. This page's data was last updated July 22, 2026. The overall allowance rate is total allowed divided by total decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) across all art units — not an average of the per-art-unit rates; pending applications are excluded. Figures are rounded for display. Pooled sample: 551 applications.

Rejection rates. Each §-rate is the share of this examiner's applications that drew at least one office-action rejection in which that statutory ground appears; applications with no rejection on record are excluded, and because grounds can co-occur the four do not sum to 100%. The art-unit figure beside each is the unweighted mean of the per-examiner rates across the art unit, published for §101 and §103 only. Beside the overall allowance rate we show a benchmark: for a single-art-unit examiner it is exactly that art unit's average, labeled “art-unit average”; for an examiner spanning several art units it is the “weighted peer average” — the per-art-unit averages, weighted by this examiner's application count in each — labeled distinctly because it is a blended figure, not any single art unit's average. Both are built from the same per-art-unit averages the panels show.

Lynch LLP is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Examiner statistics are derived from publicly available USPTO data.

These statistics describe past examiner behavior and do not predict the outcome of any particular application. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Where this page compares an examiner's allowance rate to an art-unit average, that comparison is a factual description of the public record, not a characterization of any individual examiner's conduct or competence.

This page is for general informational purposes and is not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by viewing it. Full disclaimers →

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING — Sean Lynch, Partner, Lynch LLP